On 7/31/2014 7:03 PM, KC wrote:
This was clipped from a local racing forum, I have no reason to doubt
it's validity although I didn't get to check it out...

snip
The Massachusetts State Police and the Department of Transportation
today announced that Troop E of the State Police will roll numerous
extra patrols on the Massachusetts Turnpike from Friday through Monday
as part of a multi-state effort to enforce traffic laws and interdict
dangerous drivers.
Massachusetts and 14 other states tomorrow will kick off the “I-90/94
Challenge” on Interstates 90 and 94 across the United States. Here,
Troop E, which is responsible for patrolling the Turnpike (Route 90)
from Boston to the New York line, will conduct enforcement efforts
focusing on distracted and impaired driving, excessive speed, seatbelt
use, motorcycle violations, and defective equipment on and unsafe
driving of large trucks and buses. Troop E will utilize marked,
semi-marked, low profile, and unmarked patrol vehicles.
In addition to normal staffing levels, additional troopers will be added
to every shift throughout the 96-hour period to conduct saturation
patrols throughout the length of the Turnpike. The road patrols will be
complemented by patrols run by members of the Troop E Community Action
Team and Commercial Vehicle Enforcement Unit.
/snip

Be careful out there, looks like it's open season or commuters this
weekend


Sounds like a wonderful idea to me. Hope they nail a couple of hundred
people texting while driving.

I was on Rt.3 driving south (towards the Cape) today, heading just a few
exits down to Lowe's to pick up some light bulbs. Traffic was heavier
than normal for a Thursday ... maybe due to vacationers heading for
Plymouth or down the Cape for the weekend. I was in the granny lane and
passed a Honda who was in the passing lane but only doing about 45 mph
and weaving back and forth. First thought was a DUI, so I kept an eye
on him. They I realized he was texting on a cell phone, occasionally
looking up to see where he was on the road. This went on for a few
minutes, then he put the phone down and sped up to match traffic speed
(passing me).

Love to see people like him nailed.

Poor L'il Snottie doesn't realize that effective law enforcement is a good thing.
One of the better uses of our tax dollars.

On Thursday, July 31, 2014 7:52:41 PM UTC-4, True North wrote:
Poor L'il Snottie doesn't realize that effective law enforcement is a good thing.

One of the better uses of our tax dollars.

Shut up stupid...he wasnt even talking to you.

Ever notice how dickhead donnies replies all look just like his Masters (krause the slug) ??

On Thursday, 31 July 2014 21:59:04 UTC-3, wrote:
On Thursday, July 31, 2014 7:52:41 PM UTC-4, True North wrote:

Poor L'il Snottie doesn't realize that effective law enforcement is a good thing.



One of the better uses of our tax dollars.



Shut up stupid...he wasnt even talking to you.



Ever notice how dickhead donnies replies all look just like his Masters (krause the slug) ??

I rest my case, although I just wish the law was a little more effective.

On Thursday, July 31, 2014 10:35:34 PM UTC-4, True North wrote:
On Thursday, 31 July 2014 21:59:04 UTC-3, wrote:

On Thursday, July 31, 2014 7:52:41 PM UTC-4, True North wrote:



Poor L'il Snottie doesn't realize that effective law enforcement is a good thing.







One of the better uses of our tax dollars.







Shut up stupid...he wasnt even talking to you.







Ever notice how dickhead donnies replies all look just like his Masters (krause the slug) ??



I rest my case, although I just wish the law was a little more effective.

OOOOOOOOOHH...Im so scared.


Tick...Tick...Tick.....

The law won't save your ass. You need a Mexican Massage.

On 7/31/2014 11:03 PM, wrote:
On Thursday, July 31, 2014 10:35:34 PM UTC-4, True North wrote:
On Thursday, 31 July 2014 21:59:04 UTC-3, wrote:

On Thursday, July 31, 2014 7:52:41 PM UTC-4, True North wrote:



Poor L'il Snottie doesn't realize that effective law enforcement is a good thing.







One of the better uses of our tax dollars.







Shut up stupid...he wasnt even talking to you.







Ever notice how dickhead donnies replies all look just like his Masters (krause the slug) ??



I rest my case, although I just wish the law was a little more effective.

OOOOOOOOOHH...Im so scared.


Tick...Tick...Tick.....

The law won't save your ass. You need a Mexican Massage.


He ****ing sits up there trolling all day, praying the "law enforcement
was better"... so he can be even more of a coward and be even less
accountable for his dickhead actions...

True North wrote:
On Thursday, 31 July 2014 21:59:04 UTC-3, wrote:
On Thursday, July 31, 2014 7:52:41 PM UTC-4, True North wrote:

Poor L'il Snottie doesn't realize that effective law enforcement is a good thing.
One of the better uses of our tax dollars.


Shut up stupid...he wasnt even talking to you.



Ever notice how dickhead donnies replies all look just like his Masters (krause the slug) ??
I rest my case, although I just wish the law was a little more effective.
How is the "law" ineffective?

On 8/2/2014 12:43 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 01 Aug 2014 20:49:20 -0400, Earl
wrote:

I rest my case, although I just wish the law was a little more effective.
How is the "law" ineffective?

Traffic laws have not really made the drivers any better.


Wow.

On Sat, 02 Aug 2014 00:43:10 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 01 Aug 2014 20:49:20 -0400, Earl
wrote:

I rest my case, although I just wish the law was a little more effective.
How is the "law" ineffective?

Traffic laws have not really made the drivers any better.

===

You could argue that the laws don't make drivers better in the sense
that their skills improve, but the laws certainly help keep them in
check. I think you'd have a lot more reckless behavior on the roads
if not for traffic enforcement.

On Saturday, 2 August 2014 11:15:08 UTC-3, wrote:
On Sat, 02 Aug 2014 08:33:47 -0400, Wayne.B

wrote:



On Sat, 02 Aug 2014 00:43:10 -0400, wrote:



On Fri, 01 Aug 2014 20:49:20 -0400, Earl

wrote:



I rest my case, although I just wish the law was a little more effective.

How is the "law" ineffective?



Traffic laws have not really made the drivers any better.



===



You could argue that the laws don't make drivers better in the sense

that their skills improve, but the laws certainly help keep them in

check. I think you'd have a lot more reckless behavior on the roads

if not for traffic enforcement.



It is easy to argue that most accidents are caused by distracted

driving, poor skills and intoxication. Most enforcement seems to be

aimed at speeders, simply because that is far easier to detect and

prosecute. In most places, state cops are just "speeder maids".

A cop sitting in the bushes with a radar gun is not really

contributing to safety that much.



Most of the "laws" themselves are about equipment and emissions, not

drivers.



In a lot of places "traffic enforcement" is actually used as a means

to conduct unconstitutional searches, involving more than a little

profiling.

It seems to be fairly productive, generating lots of non-traffic

related arrests but a lot of innocent people are harassed in the

process.



If someone is going to run into me I'd rather they did it at the posted speed limit or lower, not 20 km above it.
Up here you get hit with a 'stunting' charge if you're caught speeding at 50km above posted speed limits. (approx 30 mph)
Usually the 1st fine is in the $2400.00 range
http://autos.ca.msn.com/specials/roa...4319270&page=7